If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. - George Orwell

Saturday, February 03, 2007

M.I.B guard girl students (Those who dress like Pakis... part II )

Men In Buruga are guarding the girl students of Jamia Hafsa who have refused to vacate a children’s public library until the government enforces Sharia law in Pakistan.

"Some of the burqa-clad people occupying a children’s public library here are actually men and not women", a student of the Jamia Hafsa seminary said on Thursday. Students of the girls seminary have taken over the library to protest at the demolition of a mosque built on encroached state land. The girl student said on condition of anonymity that burqa-clad male students not only guard the library, but also roam freely in the Jamia Hafsa compound, and the girl students resented this. “When we told the male students to leave the compound and not to trespass, they paid no heed, saying that they were there for our safety and protection,” she said. nni"

“We want Sharia or we are ready to embrace martyrdom,” representatives of the ‘Students Action Committee’ told reporters here on Thursday.

33:59O prophet! tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks all over their bodies. That will be BETTER, that they should be KNOWN (as free respectable women) so as NOT to be ANNOYED. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Mohodhey was jealous of the young male cousins of Aisha visiting her. That was why he forced his wives and his women followers to wear that outrageous burqa. He was just a filthy old jealous pedophile. Dumb women followers are following this order like zombies since then. Others are forced by their jealous menfolk. I say liberate our women from the curse of the burqa.

men with real b#@*ls must stand up and stop these men with fake b%#*@ls from spreading this buruga disease. Women with brains must oppose this stupid stuff. Otherwise we will end up with a gender apartheid society.

Mr. Nass,I used the word Paki... as short form for Pakistani. I think it is quite common to shorten long words. Sri Lankan as Lankan, S'porean for Singaporeans, Bangaalhi for Bangladeshi.etc., No racial connotation was intended nor do I believe applies in my posting. A large part of the Pakistani population especially those whose dress styles and lifestyles the Maldivians are copying do suffer from a host of social and humanitarian problems like discriminaion of women, female genital mutilation, honor killings etc. That was the direction of my post.

Yes, and Brit for British, Aussie for Australian and so on. I think Nass feels that the call against gender Apartheid in the form of buruga is racist. If so, why is that so, Nass?

"Pakistan" comes from "Pak-e-istan" which means "home of the pure". The Indian Muslim Congress chose this name for their apartheid homeland specifically as an insult to what remained of India after the partition. The implication was that India without West Punjab, Sind, East Bengal, Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Agency was the "Na-Pak-e-istan" or the "home of the impure". So if anything is racist it is the name "Pakistan" that is. Pakistan remains the most outrageously gross and unsucessful states created in the wake of World War II.

Vainrooney wrote: "A few people's actions don't reflect on the whole religion". We must remember that sometimes they do, especially when the actions are those of Mohodhey and his companions. Mohodhey pillaged entire communities just because they did not believe him. He killed all the men of those communities and sold all the women and children into slavery. He kept the prettiest of them for himself and raped some of them the same day their husbands, fathers and brothers were killed. So yes, these actions reflect on the whole religion and those who follow it.

"And how to u explain the killings in Palastine, Iraq n Afghanistan?" What exactly does they have to do with what Mohodhey did 1400 year ago? - other than the fact that most of these killings are committed by those who follow Mohodhey in the name of Islam. Two wrongs don't suddenly produce a right. So whatever proof you may have for that is totally and utterly irrelevant to justify what Mohodhey did 1400 years ago.

PS: Vainroony, if you are thinking of writing a rebuttal to Dr Sina's prologue, don't worry, many did. Click here to read the most recent rebuttal and Dr. Sina's demolition of it. I look forward to reading your reply to Dr. Sina.

"men with real b#@*ls must stand up and stop these men with fake b%#*@ls from spreading this buruga disease. Women with brains must oppose this stupid stuff. Otherwise we will end up with a gender apartheid society."

1) u spoke of ppl who wear buruga as if they were a plague or a disease.

2) Saying that women who wear burugaa have no brains.

3) It's not only ur community. It's their community as well. So u don't have the right to say anythin like that.

4) Plus, it's a human right to wear what they want. Freedom of culture.

5) Islamic dress code was imposed on us by our religion. We have the right of practicing whatever religion we want. So by calling a practice of our religion as "stupid" n opposing that means ur tryin to take away that right. N u have no right to do that.

You still haven't explained why Abulbarakaath the Barbarian deserved being called a "racist". Those who wear the buruga do not belong to a specific race as such. He was referring to Maldivian Muslims who now wear the buruga. I presume that Abulbarakaath the Barbarian himself is a Maldivian albeit not a Muslim. As almost all Maldivians belong to the same race one would normally imagine, as it were, that he cannot be racist towards his own race.

A race or ethnicity is based primarily on genetics with some cultural aspects such as a common language. You are claiming that Muslims belong to the same race by virtue of religion. This is not correct for two reasons. Firstly it is possible, although risky to one's life, to leave Islam while it is impossible to leave one's genes. Secondly Islam is not a religion. It is a fascist killing cult that deprives its followers their basic human right to leave the cult. Islam seeks to impose itself on the world by converting, subjugating to subhuman status or killing non-Muslims. Such a cult does not have any rights in a civil world. What you are saying is like a Nazi insisting on exercising his right to kill oponents.

Abulbarakaath the Barbarian is quite right when he calls Maldivian buruga women stupid. Who in her right mind would "choose" to wear that garment in a climate where the temperature averages at 30C and the humidity averages at 90% when it is not even part of our national cultural heritage? One has to be absolutely daft to be wrapped so like a brainless mummy!

vainrooney is actually an addu girl called Nasra (nass). she can be seen commenting on all maldivian blogs. the only country she has been to is malaysia and she thinks it's heaven because many buruga women can be seen there. what a fool and a moron this silly maldivian nasra is.

Mohamed bin Abdulla: if few peoples actions reflect the religion why did the Christians kills Jesus! I guess that justifies to kill all Christians one by one ha?

In his book, "Islam: Impressions and Studies," Count de Castri says, "After the Arabs yielded to, and believed in the Quran, and people received enlightenment through the True Religion, the Moslems appeared with a new show to the peoples of the earth, with conciliation and treatment on basis of free thinking and belief. The Quranic verses then succeeded one another, calling on kind treatment, after those verses in which warnings had been addressed to the heretic tribes... Such were the instructions of the Apostle after the Arabs had embraced Islam, and the Caliphs who succeeded Mohammed followed his example. This makes me say with Robertson that the people of Mohammed were the only ones who combined kindness to others and the pleasure of seeing their Faith spread. It was this affection that pushed the Arabs on the way of conquest. The Quran spread its wings behind its victorious troops that invaded Syria and moved on like a thunderbolt to North Africa, from the Red Sea to the Atlantic, without leaving a trace of tyranny on the way, except what is inescapable in every war, and never did they massacre a nation who rejected Islam..."

Firstly, those who killed Jesus were not Christians. The Jewish priestly heirarchy in Jerusalem determined that Jesus blasphmed. They did not have the authority to execute anyone and so they complained to the Roman civil authorities. The Roman governor Pontius Pilate was going to dismiss the complaint as a silly argument amongst Jews. He reluctantly acted when it was pointed out that the Roman emperor Caesar Augustus would discipline him for not acting against someone (Jesus) who claimed to be "King of the Jews". The execution was ordered by Pilate and carried out by Roman guards. In case you are unaware it was about 300 years before any significant number of Romans embraced Christianity. At the time of Jesus' crucifixion not a single Roman was a Christian. In fact the Christian Church came into being 53 days after Jesus' crucifixion on the day of Pentecost. So technically speaking, when Jesus was crucified there was not a single Christian.

Secondly you are right when you say that a few people's actions ought not to reflect on a whole religion. However when it so happens that the author (Mohodhey) of a killing cult happens to be the perpetrator of these actions, it would necessarily reflect on the whole killing cult and those who follow it.

Thirdly let me ask you if you want me to be impressed when you quote from someone whose name appears to be that of a European feudal aristocrat? I am impressed only by sound arguments. If your European count says something stupid then my only conclusion is that he is stupid.

Mohamed bin Abdulla: First, as per the Gospels, Jesus (pbuh) had no disagreement with Rome and did not violate any Roman law. And yet he was crucified by the Romans in accordance with Roman law, and with a means exclusively reserved for those guilty of crimes against the empire...

Before putting up the cross, the Romans fastened a sign to the upright above his head and wrote on it the specifications of his crime. It read: THIS IS JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS...

So the only religion back then was Jewish, Christianity was made up later on as even you say the Christian Church came into being 53 days after Jesus crucification!

They have been fooled by the Jews as you are being fooled by now...

Second, all claimed by Ali Sina on Mohammed (pbuh) have no solid proof! At times of war, killing is a necessity and all civilization have done it... As God says in the Quran Al-Fitnah is worse than killing... All those who create Fitnah is subject to be killed in order to have a peaceful world... And that is understandable by all and practices even in our this so called civilized times... As all the verses sited in the site you provided were on instruction on how to defend at times war... After having attained a certain level of scientific and cultural progress, western countries still tend at present to solve their problems by way of war, "Desert Storm". Hence, on the human level, one cannot see why Islam should have disallowed war fourteen centuries ago, while it intended to bring about general development, both on the religious and social scene.

Third, it is not to impress you... I have many books where the western unbiased authors have talked about Mohammed (pbuh) with praised... How can that many be stupid?

Fourth, show me your claim and proof one by one and I shall do my best to enlighten you...

In his book "Civilization of the Arabs," Dr. Gustav LeBon says, "The reader will find, in my treatment of the Arabs' conquests and the reason of their victories, that force was never a factor in the spread of the Quranic teachings, and that the Arabs left those they had subdued free to exercise their religious beliefs. If it happened that some Christian peoples embraced Islam and adopted Arabic as their language, it was mainly due to the various kinds of justice on the part of the Arab victors, with the like of which the non-Moslems were not acquainted. It was also due to the tolerance and leniency of Islam, which was unknown to the other religions."

He further explains, "The mercy and tolerance of the conquerors were among the reasons for the spread of their conquests and for the nations' adoptions of their Faith and regulations and language, which becamse deeply rooted, resisted all sorts of attack and remained even after the disappearance of the Arabs' control on the world stage, though historians deny the fact. Egypt is the most evident proof of this. It adopted what the Arabs had brought over, and reserved it. Conquerors before the Arabs -- the Persians, Greeks and Byzantines -- could not overthrow the ancient Pharaoh civilization and impose what they had brought instead."

Yusuf Abdulla Shunan, at first you said that Christians killed Jesus. Then you proceeded to agree with me that it was the Romans who executed him for reasons that I stated. Is there any other rapid change of mind in store there? Or were you just testing me?

No one disputes that the religion of the Jews of the time, as it is now, was Judaism. The religion of the Romans of the time was the Roman state religion. No Christian disputes that the Christian Church came into being on Pentecost, 50 days after Jesus' resurrection. You seem to think you are scoring a major point against Christians by repeating these facts. It was an ignorant myth invented by Mohodhey that Jesus received a revelation called Injeel from Allah (God forbid!) via Gabriel and that Christianity was set up by Jesus in the same way as Islam was concocted by Mohodhey. You obviously believe in this myth and assume that it is the Christian belief as well. That is why you say that "Christianity was made up later on" as if you are busting a major scandal. You have not busted any scandal, so there is no need to be so condescending and triumphal. That the Christian Church came into being 50 days after the resurrection is part and parcel of Christian dogma.

If you feel that Ali Sina's assertions have no proof, don't be afraid! Confront him and display the gall to say that to him, rather than to me. Obviously you are too scared to be skinned alive in true Sina form.

Vainrooney, irrespective of nationality or creed, if someone says something stupid, I always recognise it to be stupid. As usual, you missed the point. Your friend Yusuf also misses the point and continues to copy and paste huge chunks of text from stupid non-Muslim writers.

Why do you Muslims always need us kuffar to reassure you that your killing cult is a religion? Perhaps you will tell me next that George W. Bush sent you a Ramadan greeting and use that as proof.

Well Romans are the present day Christians! Maybe they are in the same faith as before or not, which I can't say and is irrelevant! Don't try to mislead and turn the topic around, the point is you all sis or allowed that killing of Jesus (pbuh) and now you are trying to blame someone else for it! Be brave enough to admit the truth, it is alright to say that you can't or were too coward to even defended Jesus (pbuh)...

In reality you dispute about that fact of revelation to Jesus too!The Hebrew phrase ἀποκάλυψις ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (ajpokaluyi" Ihsou Cristou, “the revelation of Jesus Christ”) could be interpreted as either an objective genitive (“the revelation about Jesus Christ”), subjective genitive (“the revelation from Jesus Christ”), or both (M. Zerwick’s “general” genitive [Biblical Greek, §§36-39]; D. B. Wallace’s “plenary” genitive [ExSyn 119-21]). In 1:1 and 22:16 it is clear that Jesus has sent his angel to proclaim the message to John; thus the message is from Christ, and this would be a subjective genitive. On a broader scale, though, the revelation is about Christ, so this would be an objective genitive. One important point to note is that the phrase under consideration is best regarded as the title of the book and therefore refers to the whole of the work in all its aspects. This fact favors considering this as a plenary genitive.

Hmm...

I have no intension of confronting Ali Sina right now! But if need be, I will not be afraid, I will gladly do that... I am patient and have plenty of time right now...

To learn history we have to refer to the books of the historians and base on their research... I can't reinvent the wheel and to do it would be foolish... It was not my intension to show you the text of your so called 'kuffar', I never said that, you SAID that! All I wanted was an unbiased view of Islamic History!

As for Gustave Le Bon was a French social psychologist, sociologist, and amateur physicist. He was the author of several works in which he expounded theories of national traits, racial superiority, herd behavior and crowd psychology. You can find more on him in wikipedia and Gustave Le Bon's works

How about this fact... Both Christians, Muslims, Jews and Others when they review Islam in an unbiased view have found it as the best religion on the planet earth right now... But Christianity contradict one another, with all your books... So let me tell what historians find out when they compared Arab conquerers against the Crusaders!

Dr. LeBon adds in his book, "The early Arab conquests might have blurred their common sense and made them commit the sorts of oppression which conquerors usually commit, and thus ill-treat the subdued and compel them to embrace the Faith they wanted to spread all over the globe. Had they done so, all nations, which were still not under their control, might have turned against them, and they might have suffered what had befallen the Crusaders in their conquest of Syria lately. However, the early Caliphs, who enjoyed a rare ingenuity which was unavailable to the propagandists of new faiths, realized that laws and religion cannot be imposed by force. Hence they were remarkably kind in the way they treated the peoples of Syria, Egypt, Spain and every other country they subdued, leaving them to practice their laws and regulations and beliefs and imposing only a small Jizya in return for their protection and keeping peace among them. In truth, nations have never known merciful and tolerant conquerors like the Arabs."

Now you may say, I am not into history, then why are you bothered with Muhammed's history (pbuh)?

Yusuf Abdulla Shuan. After your most idiotic statement so far "Well Romans are the present day Christians! Maybe they are in the same faith as before ..." I feel the time has come for me to rest my case. To pursue this exchange with you any further would be an insult to intelligence. You may still be attempting to justify your earlier statement that it was Christians who executed Jesus. You attempt to distort undisputed historical facts and use material written in other baseless works to justify that your killing cult Islam deserves to be called a religion. Islam began as a figment of the imagination of a psychopathic pedophile which became a dangerous fascist movement in the lifetime of its narcissistic architect. It remains so to this day. Mankind will not be safe until your Islam is wiped off the face of the earth in the same way as other such ideologies as Nazism and Communism.

2:140Say "Dispute you with us about Allah while He is our Lord and your Lord? And we are to be rewarded for our deeds and you for your deeds. And we are sincere to Him. Or say you that Ibrahim (Abraham), Ismail (Ishmael), Ishaq (Isaac), Yaqub (Jacob and Al-Asbat (the offspring of the twelve sons o Yaqub) were Jews or Christians?" Say, "Do you know better or does Allah? And who is more unjust than he who conceals the testimony he has from Allah? And Allah is not unaware of what you do."

3:199And there are, certainly, among the people of the Scriptures, those who believe in Allah and in that which has been revealed to you, and in that which has been revealed to them, humbling themselves before Allah. They do not sell the Verses of Allah for a little price, for them is a reward with their Lord. Surely, Allah is Swift in account.

4:18And the Jews and the Christians say "We are the children of Allah and His loved ones." Say "Why then does He punish you for your sins?" nay, you are but human beings of those He has created, he forgives whom He wills and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heaven and the earth and all that is between them, and to Him is the return.

5:72Surely, they have disbelieved who say "Allah is th Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary)" But th Messiah said "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Verily, whosoever sets up partners with Allah, them Allah has forbidden Paradise to him, and the Fire will be his adobe. And for the Zalimun there are no helpers.Surely, disbelievers are those who said "Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)," But there is no Ilah but One Ilah. And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall on the disbelievers among them.

5:82Verily, you will find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers the Jews and those who are Al-Mushrikun, and you will find in love to the believers those who say "We are Christians" That is because amongst them are priests and monks, and they are not proud.And when they listen to what has been sent down to the Messenger you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of the truth they have recognized. They say "Our Lord! we believe, so write us down among the witnesses."

9:30And the Jews say : 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths, resembling the saying of those who disbelieved afore time. Allah's Curse be on them, how thy are deluded away from the truth!'

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.He descended to the dead.On the third day he rose again.He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father.He will come again to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.

The LORD bless you and keep you; the LORD make His faceshine upon youand be gracious to you; the LORD turn His face toward you and give you peace.

I believe in...2:115-117And to Allah belong the east and the west, so wherever you turn there is the Face of Allah. Surely, Allah is All Sufficient for His creatures' needs, All KnowingAnd they say: Allah has begotten a son. Glory is to Him. Nay, to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and on earth, and all surrender with obedience to Him.The Originator of the heavens and the earth, he only says t it : "Be!" and it is.

nass:4:157And because of their saying "We killed Messiah Isa (Jesus) son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah" - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of Isa (Jesus) was put over another man, and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. Fore surely; they killed him no...

The advice!4:171-172O people of the Scripture! Do not exceed the limits in your religion, nor say of Allah aught but the truth. The Messiah Isa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) was a Messenger of Allah and His Word, which He bestowed on Maryam (Mary) and a spirit (Ruh) created by Him; so believe in Allah and His Messengers. Say not "Three (trinity)!" Cease! (it is) better for you. For Allah is (the only) One Ilah, glory is to Him above having a son. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. And Allah is All-Sufficient as a Disposer of affairs.

The Messiah will never be proud to reject to be a slave of Allah, nor the angels who are the near. And whosoever reject His worship and is proud, then He will gather them all together unto Himself...

Nass, when you ask "If you believe Jesus Christ is your Lord, why did he die?....A god who can die!Wow!" you blaspheme bigtime. Of course the Omnipotent God can die should He choose to. He chose to die and rise from the dead. If you believe this to be impossible you do not believe in God's omnipotence. Therefore you have blasphemed and are now a kaafaru.

004.157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Al-Qur'an, 004.157 (An-Nisa [Women])

'but the resemblance of Isa (Jesus) was put over another man' - this part is actually not in the Quran, its just the translators note

Mohamed bin Abdulla: Yeah I do cut and paste, so? But I never mentioned Taliban, you said that! You can safely IGNORE me in the credit list ;)

anonymous:don't lie! the translation/interpretation of the end portion of the verse 4.157 reads: "wa lakin shubbiha lahum"

wa means: And, also, but, whilst. lakin means; But, still, nevertheless. shubbiha means; To be made like; A likeness or similitude. This could refer to: A likeness or similitude of Jesus, or of Killing or of Crucifixion or of both Killing & Crucifixion. lahum means; Was made for them.

Below are the other English translations by Muslims and non Muslim scholars for comparison:

1. Translation by Allama Abdullah Yusuf Ali: "But they killed him not, nor crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them."

2. Translation by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall: "...They slew him not nor crucified but it appeared so unto them;"

3. Translation by Professor Arthur J. Arberry: "...yet they did not slay him, neither crucified him, only a likeness of that was shown to them."

It is perfect time to make some plans for the future and it's time to be happy. I have read this post and if I could I wish to suggest you few interesting things or tips. Perhaps you could write next articles referring to this article. I desire to read even more things about it!Here is my page : transfer news epl arsenal

"The strongest proof of real, extremely despotic power in Islam is the fact that it has been able to invalidate, in such large measure, the entire history (customs, religion, previous way of looking at things, earlier imagination) of the peoples converted to it. It accomplished this only by instilling into them a new religious arrogance which was stronger than everything and induced them to be ashamed of their past."

"Is the fate of gradually becoming an Arab nation the Maldive Islanders' only option?This is the Maldivian dilemma since they made the decision to accept the Arabs as their undisputed cultural masters and began to sever their links with their own past.Nowadays Maldivians are culturally restless people who can never be at ease.The intense indoctrination of the 1980s and 90s, when Islamization was imposed on the islands at a much higher gear than at any time in the nation's history, has made Maldivians feel uncozy in their own country.The changes brought about have been of such magnitude and in such a short time, that there is now a whole young generation of Divehi people who, having not known how things were previously, take for granted that their home nation has always been so orthodox and impersonal."

- Xavier Romero-Frias in THE MALDIVE ISLANDERS, A Study of the Popular Culture of an Ancient Ocean Kingdom

"The Islamic conquerors took everything from the newly conquered: money, language, culture, traditions, wives, children, values. Everything. The nature of Islam is that it replaces cultures wherever it gets a foothold."

150 Maldivian Adulteresses To Be Flogged

Stop the Islamic religious duty of Fuc-Kendun in Maldives!

When a husband pronounced his wife divorce three times “thrice divorced” and wants to remarry her, he cannot do it lawfully until he pays another man “Al Mohalil”(which means the legalizer) who marries this thrice divorced woman and (had sexual intercourse or consummating the marriage with her) and then dismisses her so that she may lawfully marry her former husband.

In Quran sura al-Baqara 2:230 says,”…So if a husband divorced his wife he cannot after that remarry her until after she has married another husband, and he has divorced her, in that case there is no blame on either of them if they reunite…”

Abu Dawud (2142) - "The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife."

ISLAMIC FUK-KENDUN IS A MORAL AND PHYSICAL RAPE.

In Islam a husband can reunite with his wife after divorcing her under this condition: When a woman is divorced irrevocably, she can not return to her husband until she marries (including having sexual intercourse) with another man. "Narrated Aisha: The wife of Rifaa Al-Qurazi came to Allah's Apostle and said, 'O Allah's Apostle, Rifaa divorced me irrevocably. After him I married Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi who proved to be impotent.' Allah's Apostle said to her, 'Perhaps you want to return to Rifaa? Nay (You cannot return to Rifaa ) until you and Abdur-Rahman (the impotent man) engage in sexual intercourse! '" Vol. 7:186

The making of the ancient Dhivehi island people into semi-Arab Muslims

How Dhivehi minds are groomed to become lifelong zombies that they can't apply minimum logic and reason to discover numerous obvious errors and contradictions in the Quran and Hadith and that they consider the most horrendous, unethical and barbarous actions of Muhammad as acts of great morality and humanity...

Did you know ?

Until about 100 years ago in Divehi we didn't say "salaan kurun"?We said Namaskaarakurun or Swasti(Swasti = Peace)

men & women are equal in Islam?

Women cannot touch the Koran during certain days because they are unclean

Dhivehistanis want to conquer the world for Allah

"Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies..." -- Koran 8:60

Muslim Arab missionaries and Dhivehi collaborateurs

Muslims cite Islamic taboos and Koranic injections as more important than freedom of thinking. Freedom of expression is and always has been subject to Islamic taboos. Islamic taboos exist to keep Muslims from thinking independently and these taboos are enforced by Mullahs and Islamic rulers. Those who oppose are silenced or beheaded. Public expression against Mohammed or Allah will be labeled as apostate and those dissenters will be severely punished. Strict censorship is imposed on TV, film, magazines and newspapers by religious bodies and by the government.

"If a book be false in its facts, disprove them; if false in its reasoning, refute it. But for God's sake, let us freely hear both sides if we choose". -Thomas Jefferson, third US president, architect, and author (1743-1826)

“If these writings of the Greeks agree with the book of God, they are useless and need not be preserved; if they disagree, they are pernicious and ought to be destroyed”. - Umar the Caliph of Islam after the conquest of Alexandria in 641, ordered the great library to be destroyed.

The books were then used to heat the furnaces of the numerous bath-houses of the city.

Maldives Minister of Islamic Affairs says

"Shari’ah law ultimately requires the killing of those who leave Islam."

All smiles after being found guilty of massacring 52 Hindus in a 2003 bombing, Hanif Anees is also quite dedicated to his religion. (Care to guess which one?)

Maldives Constitution: No Citizenship for non-Muslims

Article 9, Section D : “a non-Muslim may not become a citizen of the Maldives.”

By denying citizenship to some people on the basis of their religion, the country is violating religious minorities’ freedom of worship.

“This denial of citizenship to non-Muslims is an extraordinarily harsh measure which places the Maldives among the worst countries in the world in regards to the legal foundation for freedom of religion and belief,”

What does the Koran say about Jihad?

In Islam's 3 Holy Books: 97% references to jihad relate to holy war; while only 3% relate to inner struggle

"Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world." -- Sir Winston Churchill - circa 1899